We spoke to Andy Nelesen about secret interviews and how they can backfire for an organisation.
The art of the interview has changed greatly in the last decade or so, prompted primarily by the internet and the way in which it has made the world of work a far more accessible place.
Whether it is AI interviews and chatbots, or online skill assessments and purposefully ‘off kilter’ techniques, there are a range of new methods all geared around getting to the core of an applicant’s personality. Hidden or incognito tests during the recruitment process are a prime example of this.
“Secret tests are informal, often unannounced, tactics interviewers use to gauge a candidate’s behaviour, such as observing if they tidy up a coffee cup or how they respond to an awkward silence,” explained Andy Nelesen, the solutions lead for talent acquisition at SHL. “These are typically seen as clever ways that interviewers uncover personality traits or a cultural fit.
“The reality? These tricks are rarely tied to job performance. They’re one-off, inconsistent and unsupported by data. Worse, they often catch candidates off guard, not in a way that reveals deeper insight, but in a way that undermines fairness and transparency.”
Why might they be used?
According to Nelesen, the demand for top-tier talent is higher than ever. Despite this, companies continue to struggle when it comes to making the correct choices. The reason for this, he explained, is traditional hiring practices have yet to catch up with the growing complexity of today’s roles.
“In STEM, the stakes are even higher,” he said. “These roles require technical expertise, adaptability, collaboration and real-world problem-solving skills. The most effective companies retire from subjective processes and toward structured, skills-based hiring, where roles are assessed based on clearly defined competencies and interviews are conducted consistently.
“Companies often use secret tests with good intentions. They’re looking for insight beyond what a candidate says and they want to see how someone behaves under pressure or in unfamiliar territory. However, the problem is that these moments are rarely standardised or validated.”
He is of the opinion that while it might show a fragment of a person’s genuine personality or behaviours, it is a myth that subtle or reactive cues can bring forth the ‘real’ candidate. Without a clear or straightforward framework, methods that incorporate secret testing can introduce bias, create inconsistent experiences and rarely indicate whether a person is capable of succeeding.
Can you prepare yourself?
Really there are an innumerable number of hidden tests that a recruiter or an employer could use to secretly determine if you would be a good fit – far too many to list, but one of the more popular scenarios is the glass test.
This is where you are offered a beverage of some kind and how you dispose of the glass or mug afterwards is supposedly an indication of how polite, considerate and aware you are of others.
Another ‘tried and tested’ method is the trick question. This is where you are asked a completely random, virtually unanswerable question, such as the square root of an impossibly large number, or if you were a plant which variation would you be. The point is to put you on the spot and to see how you react under pressure, as well as to gain insight into your thought process.
While it can be difficult to prepare for an exam you aren’t sure you are sitting, applicants should make an effort to study the more popular techniques in advance. They should also remember to stay calm, take a minute and ponder any ‘awkward’ moments, so they can react in a way that shows they are clued-in and have a more nuanced way of thinking.
“Candidates should prepare for interviews by researching the organisation and reflecting on how their skills match the job requirements,” said Nelesen. “They should develop strong responses and provide situational examples that demonstrate their fit for the role. Practicing the STAR method (situation, task, action, result) can help structure answers effectively and enhance storytelling.”
Nelesen explained that while organisations might feel that they are getting to the heart of a candidate’s motivations and the source of their drive, often skilled candidates who are primed and ready to demonstrate their value through expected, job-relevant formats, may feel manipulated and tricked, leading to a breakdown in trust.
“Even worse, it penalises candidates who may be brilliant but not immediately perceptive of hidden cues. Instead of revealing fit, it distorts the interview signal and risks pushing away the exact talent you’re trying to attract.”
When it comes down to it, he noted, it can take significantly more than one unstructured interview to really match the predictive accuracy of a single structured interview.
“Short, structured interviews improve the candidate experience, reduce bias, save time and help organisations make smarter, data-backed hiring decisions.”
Don’t miss out on the knowledge you need to succeed. Sign up for the Daily Brief, Silicon Republic’s digest of need-to-know sci-tech news.
